In some countries, it is illegal for companies to reject job applicants for their age. Is this a positive or negative development?

In some countries, it is illegal for companies to reject job applicants for their age.
Is this a positive or negative development?

One school of thought holds that in some nations, legislation has been introduced to make it illegal for some companies to reject job applicants based on their age. This essay attempts to shed light on both merits and demerits of this tendency before concluding that it is a positive strategy to foster equality and promote the diversity of the workplace.

On the one hand, there are some justifications that explain why such legislation could have an adverse bearing on companies. Firstly, legislation could limit a company's flexibility when hiring for specific roles. In fact, in some industries and careers, physical stamina, quick adaptability to new technologies, or an understanding of contemporary market trends might be crucial. For instance, younger candidates might be better suited for roles that demand high levels of physical fitness or familiarity with the latest digital platforms,thereby forcing companies to ignore age as a factor could have a negative influence on the productivity of companies. Secondly, it could have an undesirable impact on financial status for companies. This is because older employees often require higher salaries due to their experience and seniority, and they might also be more likely to need health benefits or take sick leave. As a result, the companies could face financial burdens when hiring them, which could give rise to the deficiency of financial budget.

On the other hand, there are a host of compelling reasons as to why I am convinced that this legislation could bring enormous advantages to companies. One reason is that this approach would help boost diversity in the workplace. Specifically, a workforce that includes individuals from different age groups could bring a host of perspectives and experiences, leading to more well-rounded decision-making. Younger employees could bring modern ideas and new approaches, while older employees may offer valuable experience, wisdom, and institutional knowledge, and this could enhance creativity, innovation, and problem-solving. Another reason is that making age-based rejection illegal would encourage greater economic participation among older individuals. To be more specific, as populations in many countries are aging, it is vital to ensure that older workers are not removed from the job market based on their abilities. Many older individuals could be capable of continuing to work productively and make significant contributions, and this policy allows them to do this. This is especially important as it could help them live longer and healthier, often wishing or needing to remain in the workforce longer.

In conclusion, while it is irrefutable that enacting laws on job applicants based on their age could have some downsides, I would contend that the upsides which it offers are significantly more noteworthy.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

1. "One school of thought holds" -> "A prevailing perspective suggests"
   Explanation: "A prevailing perspective suggests" is more formal and academically appropriate than "One school of thought holds," which can sound somewhat colloquial and vague in an academic context.

2. "shed light on" -> "explore"
   Explanation: "Explore" is a more direct and precise verb that is commonly used in academic writing to discuss the examination of ideas or issues, making it more suitable than "shed light on," which is somewhat metaphorical.

3. "justifications" -> "arguments"
   Explanation: "Arguments" is more specific and academically precise than "justifications," which can imply a moral or ethical basis that may not be the case in this context.

4. "adverse bearing" -> "negative impact"
   Explanation: "Negative impact" is a clearer and more direct term than "adverse bearing," which is less commonly used in formal writing and can be confusing.

5. "flexibility when hiring" -> "flexibility in hiring"
   Explanation: "In" is the correct preposition to use with "flexibility" in this context, enhancing the grammatical accuracy and clarity of the sentence.

6. "might be better suited" -> "may be more suitable"
   Explanation: "May be more suitable" is a more formal and precise way to express potential suitability, aligning better with academic style.

7. "forcing companies to ignore" -> "requiring companies to disregard"
   Explanation: "Requiring companies to disregard" is more formal and precise, fitting better in an academic context than "forcing companies to ignore," which can sound somewhat forceful and informal.

8. "could have a negative influence" -> "could negatively impact"
   Explanation: "Could negatively impact" is a more direct and formal expression, suitable for academic writing, compared to "could have a negative influence," which is less concise.

9. "financial burdens" -> "financial constraints"
   Explanation: "Financial constraints" is a more specific and formal term that better describes the limitations imposed by financial considerations, enhancing the academic tone.

10. "deficiency of financial budget" -> "shortage of financial resources"
    Explanation: "Shortage of financial resources" is a more precise and formal way to describe a lack of funds, aligning better with academic language.

11. "boost diversity" -> "enhance diversity"
    Explanation: "Enhance" is a more formal synonym for "boost," which is typically less formal and more suited to academic writing.

12. "a host of compelling reasons" -> "a multitude of compelling reasons"
    Explanation: "A multitude of compelling reasons" is a more formal and precise phrase, suitable for academic writing, compared to "a host of compelling reasons," which is slightly informal.

13. "could bring enormous advantages" -> "could yield significant benefits"
    Explanation: "Could yield significant benefits" is a more formal and precise expression, fitting the academic style better than "could bring enormous advantages," which is somewhat colloquial.

14. "making age-based rejection illegal" -> "prohibiting age-based discrimination"
    Explanation: "Prohibiting age-based discrimination" is a more precise and formal way to describe the legal action, aligning better with academic language.

15. "often wishing or needing to remain" -> "often desiring or requiring to continue"
    Explanation: "Desiring or requiring to continue" is more formal and precise, improving the academic tone and clarity of the sentence.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

• Answer All Parts of the Question:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both sides of the argument regarding the legislation that prohibits age discrimination in hiring. The introduction clearly outlines the intention to discuss both merits and demerits, and the body paragraphs provide a balanced view. The first paragraph discusses potential negative impacts on companies, such as reduced flexibility and financial burdens, while the second paragraph highlights the positive aspects, including increased workplace diversity and economic participation of older individuals. This comprehensive approach demonstrates a strong understanding of the prompt.
  • How to improve: To further enhance the response, the writer could explicitly reference the implications of these points on society or the economy as a whole. For instance, discussing how a diverse workforce can lead to improved company performance or societal benefits could deepen the analysis.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position that the legislation is ultimately a positive development. This stance is articulated in the introduction and reiterated in the conclusion. However, the transition between discussing the negative and positive aspects could be smoother to reinforce the overall argument. The phrase "I am convinced" in the second body paragraph indicates a personal belief, which could be more formally expressed to align with the academic tone.
  • How to improve: To strengthen the clarity of the position, the writer could use transitional phrases that explicitly connect the negative aspects to the positive ones, reinforcing the argument that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Additionally, avoiding personal pronouns and opting for a more formal tone would enhance the academic quality of the essay.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents and supports ideas effectively, providing specific examples to illustrate points, such as the need for physical stamina in certain roles and the benefits of a diverse workforce. The use of examples, like the contributions of younger and older employees, adds depth to the argument. However, some points could be further elaborated, particularly the financial burdens on companies, which could benefit from more detailed examples or statistics.
  • How to improve: To improve the development of ideas, the writer could include more specific examples or case studies that illustrate the impact of age diversity on company performance or employee satisfaction. Additionally, providing data or research findings could lend further credibility to the arguments presented.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the topic of age discrimination in hiring throughout. Each paragraph directly relates to the prompt, discussing both the positive and negative implications of the legislation. There are no significant deviations from the topic, which is commendable.
  • How to improve: While the essay is well-focused, the writer should ensure that all examples and arguments directly tie back to the central question of whether the legislation is a positive or negative development. A brief summary of how each point relates to the overall argument at the end of each paragraph could reinforce this focus.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the prompt and effectively balances the discussion of both sides, while maintaining a clear position. With some refinements in transitions, elaboration of ideas, and a more formal tone, the essay could achieve an even higher score.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

• Organize Information Logically:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear structure, beginning with an introduction that outlines the topic and the writer’s stance. The body paragraphs are organized into two distinct sections: one discussing the potential negative impacts of the legislation, and the other highlighting its positive aspects. This logical progression aids the reader in following the argument. However, within the paragraphs, the flow of ideas could be improved. For instance, the transition between discussing the negative impacts on companies’ flexibility and financial status could be smoother, as they are closely related but presented as separate points without a clear link.
  • How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases that connect ideas within and between paragraphs. For example, after discussing flexibility, you could introduce the financial implications with a phrase like, "In addition to limiting flexibility, this legislation may also impose financial challenges on companies."

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate distinct ideas, with a clear introduction, two body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the argument, which aids readability. However, the second body paragraph could benefit from clearer topic sentences that explicitly state the main idea of the paragraph, as the current opening is somewhat vague.
  • How to improve: Strengthen the topic sentences of each paragraph to clearly indicate the main point. For instance, the second body paragraph could start with, "Despite the concerns regarding hiring practices, there are significant advantages to implementing age-inclusive legislation." This would provide a clearer roadmap for the reader.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable use of cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand" and "On the other hand," which effectively signal contrasting points. Additionally, phrases like "for instance" and "to be more specific" help clarify examples. However, there is a tendency to rely on a limited range of cohesive devices, which can make the writing feel repetitive and less engaging.
  • How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider variety of linking words and phrases. For example, instead of repeating "Firstly" and "Secondly," consider using alternatives like "To begin with" and "Furthermore." Additionally, using phrases like "Moreover" or "In contrast" can help create more dynamic transitions between ideas.

Overall, while the essay achieves a solid level of coherence and cohesion, focusing on improving transitions, enhancing topic sentences, and diversifying cohesive devices will elevate the clarity and effectiveness of the argument.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 7

• Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good range of vocabulary, with terms such as "legislation," "adverse bearing," "financial burdens," and "economic participation." These words effectively convey the author’s points and show an understanding of the topic. However, there are instances where more varied synonyms could enhance the richness of the language. For example, the phrase "negative influence" could be replaced with "detrimental effect" to avoid repetition and add depth.
  • How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate a broader array of synonyms and expressions. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "companies," consider alternatives like "organizations," "firms," or "businesses." Additionally, using idiomatic expressions or collocations related to employment and legislation could further diversify the vocabulary.

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are moments of imprecision. For instance, the phrase "deficiency of financial budget" is awkward; a more precise expression would be "budget constraints" or "financial limitations." Furthermore, the term "justifications" could be better replaced with "arguments" or "rationales," which are more commonly used in this context.
  • How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on context-appropriate vocabulary. Reviewing synonyms and their connotations can help in selecting the most fitting words. Engaging with academic texts or articles on similar topics can also provide insights into how to articulate ideas more precisely.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay displays a high level of spelling accuracy, with only minor errors. However, there is a notable mistake in "thereby forcing companies to ignore age as a factor could have a negative influence on the productivity of companies," where a comma is missing before "thereby." This oversight can disrupt the flow of reading and comprehension.
  • How to improve: To improve spelling and punctuation accuracy, the writer should adopt a proofreading strategy, such as reading the essay aloud or using digital tools that check for grammatical and punctuation errors. Additionally, practicing spelling through targeted exercises can help reinforce correct usage.

Overall, the essay effectively communicates its arguments and demonstrates a solid command of lexical resource, but there are opportunities for refinement in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 8

• Use a Wide Range of Structures:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable variety of sentence structures. For instance, complex sentences such as "This essay attempts to shed light on both merits and demerits of this tendency before concluding that it is a positive strategy to foster equality and promote the diversity of the workplace" effectively convey nuanced ideas. Additionally, the use of conditional phrases like "if…could" and varied sentence openings (e.g., "On the one hand," "On the other hand") enhance the overall flow and coherence of the argument.
  • How to improve: To further diversify sentence structures, consider incorporating more compound-complex sentences and varying the length of sentences. For example, you could combine shorter sentences for emphasis or clarity, or use introductory clauses to create more complex structures. Experimenting with different ways to present ideas, such as using rhetorical questions or direct addresses to the reader, can also add depth to your writing.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally exhibits strong grammatical accuracy, with few errors. However, there are minor issues, such as the missing space before "thereby" in the phrase "platforms,thereby forcing companies," which detracts from the overall professionalism of the writing. Additionally, the phrase "the deficiency of financial budget" could be more clearly expressed as "a deficiency in the financial budget." These small errors indicate a need for careful proofreading.
  • How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, focus on meticulous proofreading to catch typographical errors and ensure proper punctuation. Pay particular attention to comma placements, as they can change the meaning of sentences. Additionally, reviewing common grammatical structures and practicing with exercises can help reinforce correct usage. Consider reading your essay aloud to identify any awkward phrasing or grammatical inconsistencies that may not be immediately apparent when reading silently.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a high level of grammatical range and accuracy, attention to detail in proofreading and further diversification of sentence structures will help in achieving an even higher band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

One prevailing perspective suggests that in some nations, legislation has been introduced to make it illegal for companies to reject job applicants based on their age. This essay attempts to explore both the merits and demerits of this tendency before concluding that it is a positive strategy to foster equality and enhance the diversity of the workplace.

On the one hand, there are several arguments that explain why such legislation could have a negative impact on companies. Firstly, this legislation may limit a company’s flexibility in hiring for specific roles. In fact, in some industries and careers, physical stamina, quick adaptability to new technologies, or an understanding of contemporary market trends might be crucial. For instance, younger candidates may be more suitable for roles that demand high levels of physical fitness or familiarity with the latest digital platforms. Therefore, requiring companies to disregard age as a factor could negatively influence their productivity. Secondly, it could have an undesirable impact on the financial status of companies. This is because older employees often require higher salaries due to their experience and seniority, and they might also be more likely to need health benefits or take sick leave. As a result, companies could face financial constraints when hiring them, which could lead to a shortage of financial resources.

On the other hand, there are a multitude of compelling reasons as to why I am convinced that this legislation could yield significant benefits for companies. One reason is that this approach would help enhance diversity in the workplace. Specifically, a workforce that includes individuals from different age groups could bring a variety of perspectives and experiences, leading to more well-rounded decision-making. Younger employees could introduce modern ideas and new approaches, while older employees may offer valuable experience, wisdom, and institutional knowledge. This collaboration could enhance creativity, innovation, and problem-solving. Another reason is that prohibiting age-based discrimination would encourage greater economic participation among older individuals. To be more specific, as populations in many countries are aging, it is vital to ensure that older workers are not excluded from the job market based on their abilities. Many older individuals may be capable of continuing to work productively and making significant contributions, and this policy allows them to do so. This is especially important as it could help them live longer and healthier, often desiring or requiring to continue in the workforce longer.

In conclusion, while it is irrefutable that enacting laws against rejecting job applicants based on their age could have some downsides, I would contend that the advantages it offers are significantly more noteworthy.